Steve Jobs in mouse ears?

Steve Jobs in mouse ears?

Summary: There's a ton of speculation swirling that Disney is set to announce a buyout of Pixar Animation Studios for somewhere in the range of US$7 Billion.


There's a ton of speculation swirling that Disney is set to announce a buyout of Pixar Animation Studios for somewhere in the range of US$7 Billion. The acquisition would make Steve Jobs the largest individual shareholder of Disney according to a story on AppleXNet.

The buyout very much parallels Apple's purchase of NeXT ten years ago. Because so much of NeXT's advanced technology essentially displaced Apple's own struggling and dated codebase for the Mac OS to become Mac OS X, and Steve Jobs' own idea of a trimmed and stylish product line replaced the beige box Power Mac (insert four-digit number here), many industry analysts joked that 'NeXT had bought Apple for negative $400 million.'

According to a Reuters story published on ZDNet news it is not clear whether the board meeting will be held on Sunday or Monday or whether board members were prepared to vote on a proposed merger of Pixar with Disney.

According to Hoovers Disney owns the ABC television network, 10 broadcast TV stations, and more than 70 radio stations. It also has stakes in several cable channels such as ESPN (80%) and A&E Television Networks (37%).

If the merger happens you can expect a whole lot of Disney content to become available for sale from the iTunes music store.

Topic: Apple

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Content is key here

    If Jobs can do for Disney what he's done for Apple since his return,
    the company will be in for a real boost.

    But the key to this deal is all that content. It will certainly put a
    crimp in the plans of any of the other content providers, when
    Apple has exclusive access to all those Disney holdings.
    tic swayback

    The last NeXT box sold was outfitted with a 68040 CPU running at about 40Mhz (Black and white monitor). I fail to see how early 90's tech is advanced in any way.
    Roger Ramjet
    • advanced? you bet.

      You're correct that the last NeXT hardware was running 68040 CPUs, but you could get them with very (for the time) high-resolution color displays. Also, after they stopped selling hardware they continued to develop their OS for x86 systems for several years. The OS, BTW, was the only one that integrated an elegant and attractive GUI on top of a full-featured unix core (not to mention the groundbreaking objective development environment). You could make the same argument for MacOS X today although you'd meet contrariness from Linux supporters; I'm not getting into that discussion but at the time (mid-90s) I don't think there was a contest.

      The fact that NeXTStep was x86 before it went to Apple to be ported to PowerPC and morphed into MacOS X also sheds light on the apparent ease of the transition to Intel processors. Allegedly Apple has maintained functioning x86 versions of OS X all along so they pretty much had it on the shelf ready to go.
      • Let me rephrase

        When Kernigan and Ritchie developed "C" and UNIX, their pattern was reproduced largely unchanged by a succession of companies. UNIX is UNIX (as Linux is UNIX) - which means that ls, and grep, and df, and most all UNIX commands have been around since the 1970's.

        Saying a UNIX is "advanced" is like saying that a car is "advanced". Sure there's one or two new features, but in the end they do they same thing, the same way as the model that preceded them.

        Object-oriented software (such as SmallTalk) were advanced in the late 80's - but by the time NeXT became OS/X, it was so-so technology.
        Roger Ramjet
  • rutitau 44 txs

    xbhudg,zclzpfqc40, oekdo.